Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2017 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 1823 - KERALA HIGH COURTEntitlement to claim re-determination of the amount of compensation paid for land acquired from his possession, under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on the basis of an award passed by a Lok Adalat - HELD THAT:- The scope and effect of the deeming provision under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act has been considered by the Apex Court in a number of decisions. In the decision reported in Thomas v. Thomas Job [2003 (8) TMI 592 - KERALA HIGH COURT], the Apex Court had to consider whether an award passed by a Lok Adalat could be treated as a decree of a court. The case involved the dispute between two brothers with respect to partition of the properties left behind by their late father. There was a theatre in one of the properties, a portion of which was located in the property allotted to one of the brothers. He filed a suit seeking mandatory injunction for removal of the theatre portion. Recovery of possession was also prayed for. The suit was decreed as prayed for. When the matter was pending in appeal, the dispute was referred to the Lok Adalat and was settled, upon one of the brothers agreeing to sell the property to the other for consideration. When the settlement was not honoured, he initiated execution proceedings and sought to compel the other brother to execute a sale deed as agreed. The question has been again considered by the Apex Court in Govindan Kutty Menon K.N. v. C.D. Shaji [2011 (11) TMI 783 - SUPREME COURT]. The said case involved proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. During the pendency of criminal proceedings before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, the parties appeared before the Lok Adalat and the matter was settled upon payment of an amount that was agreed to. The amount was to be paid in instalments. Upon default in payment of the instalments, an Execution Petition was filed before the Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam for enforcement of the award. The Execution Court held that an award passed by a Lok Adalat on reference from the Magistrate's Court cannot be construed as a decree executable by the Civil Court. The impugned orders are quashed. The second respondent, Special Tahsildar, is directed to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners in accordance with law and to pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six weeks of the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment - Petition allowed.
|